CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO: DESIGN CHARRETTE 01

CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO: DESIGN CHARRETTE 01
This report is prepared for: Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation
Rod Keenan Director
Prue Mansfi eld Director Planning and Community Development
City of Greater Bendigo - Design Charrette 01 Report Issue: 20 December 2011 Version: DRAFT
Authors: Rob Roggema, Dr Roger Jones, Agnes Soh, Dr Stephen Clune, Shae Hunter, Anna Barilla, Zhipeng Cai, Jing Tian and Justin Walsh
for the project: Design-led Decision Support for Regional Climate
Adaptation
Project team: Rob Roggema Centre for Design, RMIT University
Prof John Martin Sustainable Regional Communities, La Trobe University
Dr Ralph Horne Centre for Design, RMIT University
Prof Roger Jones Victoria University
Dr Stephen Clune Centre for Design, RMIT University
Shae Hunter Centre for Design, RMIT University
Agnes Soh Centre for Design, RMIT University
Julia Werner RMIT University
For more information about the project, please contact Rob Roggema
Centre for Design, RMIT University 124 La Trobe Street Building 15, Level 2, Room 11 Melbourne VIC 3000 Email: [email protected]
This report is prepared for: Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation
Rod Keenan Director
Prue Mansfi eld Director Planning and Community Development
City of Greater Bendigo - Design Charrette 01 Report Issue: 20 December 2011 Version: DRAFT
Authors: Rob Roggema, Dr Roger Jones, Agnes Soh, Dr Stephen Clune, Shae Hunter, Anna Barilla, Zhipeng Cai, Jing Tian and Justin Walsh
for the project: Design-led Decision Support for Regional Climate
Adaptation
Project team: Rob Roggema Centre for Design, RMIT University
Prof John Martin Sustainable Regional Communities, La Trobe University
Dr Ralph Horne Centre for Design, RMIT University
Prof Roger Jones Victoria University
Dr Stephen Clune Centre for Design, RMIT University
Shae Hunter Centre for Design, RMIT University
Agnes Soh Centre for Design, RMIT University
Julia Werner RMIT University
For more information about the project, please contact Rob Roggema
Centre for Design, RMIT University 124 La Trobe Street Building 15, Level 2, Room 11 Melbourne VIC 3000 Email: [email protected]
introduction
the bendigo charrette
the studio
re-burn bendigo
little italy
charrette outcomes
legend + symbols
appraisal
references
1
3
4
6
8
10
13
14
16
18
20
23
24
27
28
30
32
34
36
38
50
70
88
98
100
114
116
120
Contents
sub-heading The design-led decision support for regional climate adaptation project builds on the participating regional councils for their support and willingness to be part of the project. Climate change and its impacts are to a certain extent uncertain and this is valid for this project also. The approach to organise design charrettes represents this, because in the format of design charrettes there is room to experiment, adjust the process when circumstances change and apply new information whenever available. However, dealing with these uncertainties implies dealing with a certain risk the outcomes will not be as expected. This requires courage of the council that hosts the design charrette. This is especially valid for the fi rst charrette. Therefore, the City of Greater Bendigo deserves all the credits for supporting enthusiastically the initiating, organisation en execution of the fi rst design charrette.
In dealing with the impacts of climate change the solutions are diverse and may change over time. A well-engineered solution for the problem is therefore mostly not satisfying. The solutions are multi- dimensional and require combinations of solutions for each of the parts. This requires agility in the mindset of the designers. The use of several methods to design a desired future for a climate proof Bendigo, whether the use of a camera, pencils and maps or plasticine was required, added to this ability. We have been very lucky that all participants showed this agility during the design charrette.
We look back at an intense and exciting design process, in which innovative solutions have been proposed and we look forward to continue the conversation in the second design charrette in Bendigo.
A special thank you is appropriate for Prue Mansfi eld as our main contact in Bendigo, who has supported this event to happen and helped us to put together the right group of participants, provided us with the right background material and gave us feedback on the process and program.
On behalf of all the members in the project team, I would like to thank all participants in the Bendigo Design Charrette for their contributions!
Rob Roggema
preface
introduction
To capture the spirit of the Bendigo Charrette, which took place on 17 and 18 November 2011, this quote of Dave Stewart (The Eurythmics) in “The Age” (18 November 2011) says it all.
The message for every region in Victoria is to develop in a way that meets the challenge of global warming. The increase of fl ood and bushfi re risk, droughts and heat-waves, demands urgent attention and strategies to deal with these inevitable changes. The challenge for the Bendigo design charrette was to identify those revised design and planning policies through the development of design principles that minimise the impact of climate change to the well-being of future generations.
This challenge has been formulated in the design brief as follows: “To develop a range of future scenarios,
which all sketch a future image of the City of
Greater Bendigo providing a community that is safe,
sustainable and resilient”.
“
”
2
Climate change is often seen as a threat, bringing risks to landscapes and people. This is one of the reasons why, in dealing with climate adaptation, the focus often lies on gaining more scientifi c knowledge and on conducting risk and vulnerability assessments. Does all this knowledge gathering lead to an increased adaptive capacity in regional Victoria? We suggest an approach that involves gaining and storing knowledge with a focus on optimal use of this knowledge.
This approach bypasses discussions or questions about whether climate change is ‘real’ or caused by humans. We take the estimated population growth and economic development for the Bendigo area as a starting point. Our intention is to design a regional plan, which anticipates future weather events and climate change, for the City of Greater Bendigo, given the facts and parameters of the region. In moving beyond a debate around science and knowledge we off er a design process that takes the available knowledge, both scientifi c and policy driven, and bring this knowledge to life to create and imagine a climate adaptive future for Bendigo.
A design charrette will allow us to develop these creative solutions. Charrettes are intensive and creative multi stakeholder design workshops that occur over multiple days. They allow for the development of solutions that may occur outside of regular policy processes of recent date and give participants the opportunity to think outside the box to envision ‘unthinkable futures’. Such characteristics, common to charrettes, are ideal for problems that are unclear, complex and long-term. Climate adaptation is one of these problems.
The year 2050 will be used as our planning horizon, to refl ect the long time periods over which many eff ects of climate change will become manifest appear be realised.
The Design-led Decision Support for Regional Climate Adaptation project will work with the following assumptions for the Bendigo area:
• Higher temperatures; • More severe fl oods; • Longer droughts; • Higher likelihood of bushfi res; • Providing 23,000 new houses until 2050
“Bringing knowledge to life”
3
The term ‘charrette’ originated from France. At the end of the nineteenth century the Architectural Faculty of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts issued problems that were so diffi cult few students could successfully complete them in the time allowed. As the deadline approached, a pushcart (or charrette in French) was wheeled past students’ work-spaces in order to collect their fi nal drawings for jury critiques while students frantically put fi nishing touches on their work. To miss ‘the charrette’ meant an automatic grade of zero. Charrettes are successfully used in the most controversial and complicated design and planning problems. Examples of these, as given by the NCI (National Charrette Institute) include1 [Lennartz and Lutzenhiser, 2006]:
• High stakes projects involving substantial public and private investment;
• Volatile yet workable political environments – situations that are ‘hot’ but manageable;
• Complex design problems; • Real projects that include imminent
development.
The NCI defi nes the charrette as: “a collaborative design and planning workshop that occurs over four to seven consecutive days, is held on-site and includes all aff ected stakeholders at critical decision-making points” [Lennertz and Lutzenhiser, 2006]. Building on this Condon formulates it as: “a time-limited, multiparty design event organised to generate a collaborative produced plan for a sustainable community” [2008].
A typical charrette is seen as part of a dynamic planning process, which starts with the preparation phase, followed by the charrette and fi nishes with the implementation phase. The process, as derived from both Condon [2008] and Lennartz and Lutzenhiser [2006], consists of the following phases:
The fi rst phase we distinguish is the preparation
phase. In this phase everything that is required to hold a successful design charrette is taken care of. Besides the obvious, required material, booking the venue etcetera, the main issues in the preparation phase are the design brief and the selection of participants. In the design brief the assignment is clearly defi ned. The goals and objectives, design principles, if possible the quantitative requirements and the performance targets are all described and collected. Selecting the right ‘mix’ of people to participate is essential. A combination of scientists, local experts and stakeholders, decision makers and knowledge brokers,
the design charrette
designers and technical experts, all contribute to the dynamism of the event.
The second phase consists of the visioning charrette. During this charrette the main goal is to envision the desired future. A typical visioning charrette includes the following parts: an opening event, a site tour, the design stages, during which iterative phases of conceptualisation, drawing alternatives and refi nement of the vision take place (or in the words of Condon [2008]: “talk-doodle-draw”), the public meetings and fi nally the after-party. In general, this type of charrette involves (mainly) designers for a full week. The purpose is to shift from attractive sounding prospects to real solutions, which, in this phase, are represented in designs. During the charrette a common language for solutions is developed and, because no implementation questions will be raised at this stage, the risk ideas will be rejected is minimal. However, it may be expected that, in the openness of the process several policy contradictions will be revealed.
The third phase is the implementation charrette. This charrette typically lasts for four days and involves (mainly) design facilitators and stakeholders. Its aim is to develop a shared understanding of the desired future and what is needed to realise this future. This method also addresses some of the barriers to change that exist in many governmental organisations (the so-called ‘window-of-no’). This prevents change from happening and is often well established through unwritten codes and invisible agreements. The implementation charrette is a powerful tool to go past this window of no. The fast and effi cient charrette process involves stakeholders in a powerful integrative way. The connection of participants of the charrette, who in their regular work are probably not connected helps to embed the solutions brought up in the charrette process, which may help to outpace the approval processes, which can take years.
The fi nal phase we distinguish is the writing of the charrette report. In the report the results of the charrette are presented visually and with clarity. The report functions as the ‘contract’ for the participants and may be used in formal decision making processes.
4
In conducting design charrettes Condon [2008] defi nes nine general rules for a good process. The four we acknowledge as the most signifi cant are highlighted here:
1. Design with everyone: Despite the fact that becoming a designer requires thorough training and very specifi c skills, the design process as undertaken during charrettes is integrative and contains a variety of possible solutions. This is partly an intuitive and judging activity, which makes it accessible for many individuals. In this sense, everyone is a designer;
2. Start with a blank sheet: If the group of participants are standing around the table, on which a large map of the site is laid down, the simple action to overlay this map with a blank piece of transparent paper. The invitation and the challenge are then before all. Everyone is invited to fi ll in the future and a shared vision will, in the hours to follow, fi ll up the formerly empty paper;
3. Provide just enough information: Too much information causes decision paralysis and too little produces bad proposals. Just enough is mainly arranged through the expertise of the participants and will be provided during the charrette in a concise and easy to grasp way (maps, schemes);
4. Drawing is a contract: All drawings produced during the charrette embody the consensus as experienced and achieved by the charrette team. They form a well-understood agreement, or contract, in images amongst the group. The drawings cannot be broken without consent of the group and function as such as a very strong commitment.
In this project we defi ne design charrettes as: “two or more day intensive design workshops in which a mixed group of participants work collaboratively towards designing climate adaptation future scenarios.” A design charrette: 1. Integrates intuitive, rational and emotional
knowledge; 2. Is an inventive approach, includes idea-generating
forces and results in envisioning futures; 3. Is set up in a creative atmosphere to allow many
diff erent stakeholders to collaborate; 4. Alternates between plenary discussions and
small mixed design teams to provide a creative environment to think about the future in unlimited ways;
5. Creates an environment in which out-dated frameworks, often related to individual beliefs or ‘silo-ed’ policies, can be overcome;
6. Makes use of maps and other visual tools to allow people to collaborate and integrate topographical, ecological as well as social and economic aspects.
The way design charrettes are organised help to create an atmosphere that diff ers from regular and day-to-day working environments. This environment is created because it allows people to enter a diff erent mind-set and use a broad variety of ideas, values and habits. The charrette process off ers participants the following:
• Participate in a creative way to think about the future;
• Use risk assessment data in a creative way in order to develop ideas about responses to risks;
• Develop design ideas which are based on the uncertainty and unpredictability of climate change;
• Speculate about future change and ways of living:
• Open their minds and their conversations, which not necessarily take place within settled structures and habits in government or elsewhere;
• Work in a “bottom-up” way and take local knowledge and local climate perceptions into account in designing and decision making;
• Collaborate across disciplines, organisations and levels of government;
• Share responsibilities.
Charrette objectives: 1. Bring together ‘champions’ in the fi eld of
adaptation planning, spatial planning and spatial design to explore possible futures for the City of Greater Bendigo using a 2050 time-horizon. These futures aim to interlink pathways towards more adaptive systems with spatial planning and design processes in an optimal way;
2. Launching the design-led VCCCAR project at diff erent spatial scales;
3. Presenting stimulating reports to be used in other case studies and beyond;
4. Off ering a multidisciplinary arena to identify and explore new issues relevant for the main focus of the project;
5. Bringing together team members of the diff erent ‘Design-Led’ case study areas.
More specifi c objectives for the Bendigo case study include:
• Explore the specifi c but complex climate issues Bendigo area is facing;
• To discuss possibilities how the resilience of Bendigo can be improved;
• To create designs that reveal what a Bendigo, adapted to climate change, might look like;
• To develop ideas and strategies to increase the resilience of Bendigo in the face more extreme weather events.
5
Project team:
Rob Roggema Prof John Martin Dr Ralph Horne Prof Roger Jones Dr Stephen Clune Shae Hunter Agnes Soh Julia Werner
the project: Design-led Design Support for Regional Climate Adaptation
6
The Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation Research (VCCCAR), which was established in 2009 and is funded by Victorian Government, aims to improve government and community understanding about the potential impacts of climate change and adaptation options. It does this through the funding of interdisciplinary and multi-institutional research projects, which address priorities identifi ed by the Victorian Government. Climate change adaptation has become an important consideration when discussing future development trajectories for cities and regions in Victoria.
This connection between the required adaptation and the desired urban and regional spatial development has been the major driving force for the development of the research project “Design- led Decision Support for Regional Climate Adaptation” (Roggema et al 2010)1, which State Government departments, united in the VCCCAR Investment Panel, have agreed to fund. This project takes as a starting point the premise that knowing about possible hazards and assessing their risk is an important step in understanding and dealing with climate change, but it still doesn’t give us answers yet how to design our landscapes and societies for it.
The aim of the project is to develop future visions in which the regions are more resilient to the impacts of climate change and are more capable of dealing with unforeseen (climate) events. The design of these future visions is undertaken in collaboration with a rich mix of participants including local stakeholders, state government representatives, designers and researchers. The project takes a new approach to climate change adaptation at the (sub- ) regional scale by organising and conducting design charrettes, addressing the positively and optimistic framed question “What might a ‘climate- proof’ future look like?” instead of “How do we become resistant and protect ourselves against the impacts of climate change”. The design charrettes will be conducted in three pilot regions across Victoria: City of Greater Bendigo, Swan Hill Rural City Council and Wellington Shire Council. How we deal with change is often an underlying question that is not always addressed through policy and planning processes. If we, as a community and a landscape, are confronted with more complexity and more change, as societies under threat of climate change currently are, this leads to more variety in the way we experience our environment (Wierdsma, 1999)2. One way of reacting in such circumstances
is, instead of returning to well- known procedures’ of the same’ kind, to introduce more variety and cherish diversity as a collective competence. When people are encouraged to allow for diversity in values, opinions and visions, this collective competence will dynamically emerge. It is learning by working and working by learning at the same time. This co creation of change (Wierdsma, 1999)3 can be experienced in optimal form in design charrettes. In the charrette context a variety of people are brought together, maintaining their diversity in professional expertise as well as in their own values and visions. In a well-organised and directed process all individual competencies will emerge into a collective one, crystallised by the collective drive to design the desired future. The following principles for dealing with complexity and change can be distinguished (after Wierdsma): 1. Revaluation of context specifi c knowledge of
experience (local storytelling); 2. Learn to act without disappearance of existing
plurality and diversity; 3. Organise for transactions (as the opposite of
organise for positions). Order activities, focus on the contributions (of participants) and facilitate dealing with variety: balancing between stability and dynamic enhancing activities;
4. Self organisation of units or teams and respect for their autonomy;
5. Create platforms for interactive processes; 6. Value the…